Almost all British people have British ancestry dating from Neolithic times.
We are told that the population of Britain has been replaced many times over. Then how come there are two people in the village of Cheddar who are descended from Cheddar Man?
(Cheddar Man is a 9000 year old skeleton found in Cheddar Gorge. DNA taken from the skeleton was found to match that of two of the locals).
(Cheddar Man is a 9000 year old skeleton found in Cheddar Gorge. DNA taken from the skeleton was found to match that of two of the locals).
Scroll to see replies
Because it suits their multicultural agenda, we all knows its hogwash, British people have a common look that is distinct from the continental Europeans and were one of the most homogeneous nations in the world until the 1950s, its natural, we're a bloody island so should have a more closed off ethnicity
Because 10% of Europeans share the Haplogroup U5 mtDNA which was found in the Cheddar Man.
Original post by JackHorner222
We are told that the population of Britain has been replaced many times over. Then how come there are two people in the village of Cheddar who are descended from Cheddar Man?
(Cheddar Man is a 9000 year old skeleton found in Cheddar Gorge. DNA taken from the skeleton was found to match that of two of the locals).
(Cheddar Man is a 9000 year old skeleton found in Cheddar Gorge. DNA taken from the skeleton was found to match that of two of the locals).
I'm struggling to find the connection between this and the title? How does finding two people with a certain genetic lineage suggest that almost everyone in Britain has neolithic British ancestry?
Original post by DiddyDec
Because 10% of Europeans share the Haplogroup U5 mtDNA which was found in the Cheddar Man.
No, not because 10% of Europeans share the Haplogroup U5 mtDNA. These two locals were found to be actual descendants of a close relative of Cheddar Man.
Despite the clear misnomer between thread title and post content, what do you propose to do about this?
Original post by JackHorner222
No, not because 10% of Europeans share the Haplogroup U5 mtDNA. These two locals were found to be actual descendants of a close relative of Cheddar Man.
Of the 20 locals tested, 2 had the U5 mtDNA, 10% of them.
Although is seems UCL question the credibility of the findings due to the methods used.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/debunking/stories
Original post by rockrunride
Despite the clear misnomer between thread title and post content, what do you propose to do about this?
Can't do anything about it. A fact is a fact, even with Wikipedia about.
Original post by rockrunride
Despite the clear misnomer between thread title and post content, what do you propose to do about this?
What can he do?
Original post by JackHorner222
Can't do anything about it. A fact is a fact, even with Wikipedia about.
Shall we move on then?
Original post by rockrunride
Shall we move on then?
Yes, but not to anything that contradicts facts.
Original post by Plagioclase
I'm struggling to find the connection between this and the title? How does finding two people with a certain genetic lineage suggest that almost everyone in Britain has neolithic British ancestry?
Said it perfectly, and rationalised my discontent.
Original post by JackHorner222
No, not because 10% of Europeans share the Haplogroup U5 mtDNA. These two locals were found to be actual descendants of a close relative of Cheddar Man.
So of their thousands and thousands of ancestors one of them was Cheddar Man - that proves what exactly ?They might also have DNA linking them to numerous other groups that lived hundreds if not thousands of miles away.
And I am not sure you can say that anyone could call someone who lived 9000 years ago a "close relative" Basic maths will tell you that there will be millions of descendants in the world by now.
I'm probably descended from Cheddar man. Jeez Cheddar man was probably the first home slice to exist on this side of the Edam.
The OP makes a valid point. We should kick everyone out of the country except for those 2 true Brits in Cheddar. Truly, we are now enlightened.
Having at least one Neolithic British ancestor doesn't mean ALL your ancestors have lived in Britain way back to Neolithic times.
[QUOTE="Plagioclase;59370027"]I'm struggling to find the connection between this and the title? How does finding two people with a certain genetic lineage suggest that almost everyone in Britain has neolithic British ancestry?[/QUOTE
The two people were in the same area that the skeleton was found. You obviously don't want to see the far-reaching implications of this.
The two people were in the same area that the skeleton was found. You obviously don't want to see the far-reaching implications of this.
Original post by SmallTownGirl
Having at least one Neolithic British ancestor doesn't mean ALL your ancestors have lived in Britain way back to Neolithic times.
60 to 90% of them have.
Original post by DiddyDec
Of the 20 locals tested, 2 had the U5 mtDNA, 10% of them.
Although is seems UCL question the credibility of the findings due to the methods used.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/debunking/stories
Although is seems UCL question the credibility of the findings due to the methods used.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/debunking/stories
The history teacher in the village of Cheddar was found to have the same mitochondrial DNA as Cheddar Man. How likely is it that he does not descend from Cheddar Man's family?
I obviously descend from an unbroken chain of mothers but how many times would this line meet another unbroken chain of mothers going back from another person?
There are issues with Syke's sequencing of the Cheddar Man. It is premature to draw any conclusions from it.
1) The research was never presented in a peer-reviewed journal and subject to criticism or review
2) DNA Testing has significantly advanced since 1997, and the original sequencing was not subject to the standards that are considered acceptable today.
3) Many notable sources have indicated that there is reasonable doubt that the DNA was contaminated.
1) The research was never presented in a peer-reviewed journal and subject to criticism or review
2) DNA Testing has significantly advanced since 1997, and the original sequencing was not subject to the standards that are considered acceptable today.
3) Many notable sources have indicated that there is reasonable doubt that the DNA was contaminated.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Drop ur ethnicity
- Finding my Heritage
- Why British Girl/ Men do not date Indian Boy/ Men and prefer Black Men/Boy?
- fellow asians of the UK rise up
- Flatmate
- Is my mate wrong here?
- Do you find Reginald D Hunter funny?
- Free things to do in London - Art Galleries and Exhibitions
- Does Brown Guys Living in England like Brown Girls?
- Why are you concerned about migration?
- Making friends as a transfer student
- British/European boys, would you date a Latina girl?
- What's your go-to Airline for travelling?
- confirming identity for British passport need help
- If you have success on tinder does that mean your at least fairly attractive above av
- I’m british Pakistani girl. Ask me anything...
- Will you feel British without the monarchy?
- Struggling to find jobs?
- late application for tuition fee loan and being abroad!!!!!! help :((
- residence on relevant date
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
